Lol. Thank you for the post, I really appreciate it... and thanks for putting yourself out there. I really want to grasp what you're saying, so my Big Picture of the world is more accurate.

I am just laughing because you're stepping on my toes too. I mean, that last paragraph, for example, I felt waves of pretention by the wording you chose. I don't think you meant that, though; it's just what it triggered when it reached me. It's like we are trying to communicate by reading out of foreign-language manuals, and both of us are garbling the translations. Thank goodness neither of us is armed! (... uh.. you're NOT packing... are you???)

I think when I take your hand so that you can guide me into your world, remember that you're also taking my hand and thus entering mine. Maybe we will both see something together.

... still at work, feeling ill, not home tonight either. I'll get back to you when I can.

"Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

“Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

You felt pretension in that, Jennifer? I'm not questioning your feelings, BTW...just more, trying to figure out why.
Peace baby's phrasing resonated to me, because that's how I phrase things, trying to take ownership and all that.

Currently submerged under an avalanche of books and paper work. I may come back up for air from time to time.
Real life awaits and she is a demanding mistress.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

That last paragraph about taking her hand and trusting her to lead Jennifer through the dark? Yep, it feels pretentious because there is no understanding that she is also missing Fe users meaning just as much. It appears more like she's got Fi AND Fe covered and if we'd only learn to be more trusting and let her lead the way through this scary path we could be enlightened. I want to understand, I even would welcome a tourguide or a travel manual, but I am not some lost little child, scared of the dark cave of Fi with her as the adult who will take my hand and guide me. I can't speak for Jennifer, but that's how it feels to me. I'm not saying that she actually is condescending, just that the choice of phrasing evokes feelings of annoyance in me and a desire to dig in my heels. I'm sure that my phrasing has that effect on Fi users as well. I find it helpful to know where those differences in phrasing lie and if they really reflect how the other person feels or if it's just the assumed motivations that we are attributing to the other person which jars us.

If I was to hear PB's words coming from anyone else, I would assume that explaining the tone of her words as it being passion that we feel threatened by or mistake is actually a way of saying, "I'm upset, but I don't want to admit it, so I will just say that it is because you don't understand what feeling passionate is like". That may be inaccurate, but it is the immediate reaction that I have. That is probably not a fair assessment, but I'm struggling to put an alternate and equally plausible impression in its place.

You felt pretension in that, Jennifer? I'm not questioning your feelings, BTW...just more, trying to figure out why.
Peace baby's phrasing resonated to me, because that's how I phrase things, trying to take ownership and all that.

here's the phrases that bothered me:

in order to really take this trip with me, you must take my hand and not be afraid to go to the darker places.

triggered this immediate kneejerk response: "What? I'm about as dark as they get, and I'm certainly not scared of anything you might show me. I've already been to hell and back in my life, and have spent my whole life dealing with darkness, without any real parental guidance as a child and while everyone else in my family and subculture has acted cowardly IMO. You certainly seem more fragile and needing a positive enviroment far more than I've shown myself to need; I can handle whatever gets thrown at me."

Followed by, "Am I THAT inobvious? Does anyone REALLY know me? What sort of image am I projecting? Do I look that fragile? Am I wrong about myself? What IS real?"

And what Fid said, too. She's assuming I'm afraid of the dark? Or scared to go there? What? Where did she get that from? Why is she assuming that I use Fe because I'm scared of Fi? Maybe I'm not going there with her because I don't think it's the right place to go?

Just a lot of assumptions there about who I am, what I'm afraid of, and what I need.

It's OK. I am with you. I'm not going to let you go and my intention is not to hurt you. We'll come through it OK if you let it happen.

Not as bad, but here's what I immediately felt: "Come on -- I'm an NTP. I'm not a baby, and I don't need to be coddled by an F! I've taken care of myself my ENTIRE life and walked alone for much of it, I don't need you to treat me like a child... especially when you still haven't proven to me that you're not the one who needs to be taken care of here, rather than me."

(EDIT: After rereading this, I want to clarify: Please read "F" not as MBTI "F" but as the "mothering" function... I don't like being mothered in the traditional sense, esp if I feel the other person isn't really grasping me.)

I don't consider that a "mature" response on my part, but that's what I felt, long before my brain could process it and put it into words. Some of that is the wording on her end, some of it is baggage on mine.

"Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

“Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

I enter these discussions expecting to understand as much as be understood. But I feel like I am reaching way past the center to help you (generic you) understand Fi - in order to really take this trip with me, you must take my hand and not be afraid to go to the darker places. It's OK. I am with you. I'm not going to let you go and my intention is not to hurt you. We'll come through it OK if you let it happen.

That reminds me, what if you do hurt someone though?

A Fi-user said to me (I'm paraphrasing) that Fe-users disregard what is meant (intent) and focus on the tangible (form). I don't know if "form" is the right word, but I do think Fe-users focus on the results of emotional interaction and do think the intentions of others are secondary.

Does intent really outweigh results for Fi-users?

Example:
I do dislike when I'm read wrong, aka assigned a motivation/intent I did not have, when I hurt someone's feelings. My response is to take back what I've said/written, because obviously there was a communication failure. But with Fi-users that doesn't seem to work very often, because the misidentified intent still remains and I'm unsure how to correct that. As a (weak) Fe-user it's like a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't-trap.

That helps make more sense to me. It's always seemed to me like Fi never is happy. I guess it's that it only shows itself (in group issues that we're talking about) when there's a problem, not when things are going swimmingly. Is that accurate?

What's to say Fi is happy or unhappy? I do agree that the real values for me only show up when there is a problem. I have no reason to express them otherwise; usually I just get judged for expressing them except by closer friends. For me it's like, if I don't express how I feel when I see that there is a problem, I get angry. And I pretty much need to or else I'll feel like crap. I go about this in many different ways, depending on the situation. I'm adaptive. If it's a sensitive issue (and I'm expressing what I think would be best for them to do, or why the other is in the wrong), I'll be sensitive about it. If it's really offensive, then I'll give them a piece of my mind. Etc. SFPs are the social chameleons.

Originally Posted by fidelia

So if consensus is not a goal for you guys, would you say that it's a matter of allowing everyone to be understood before the head person/people make the final decision?

Yes that sounds ideal. Why would we come to a consensus? It's totally an internal judgment on the situation. We come to a consensus unconsciously and irrationally. This is an extension of my understanding of typology keep in mind. The P types are called "irrational" types because they observe the world objectively with their Pe function, but make subjective judgments on what they see with Ji. So we don't need anyone else's input usually when we make a decision (mentally); it just happens. That's not to say that we can't get information from others to add to our decisions. My decisions aren't usually final if I see that there is something missing. If this is the case I'll ask people's opinions. I try to be morally correct; and sometimes that means understanding how others around me are feeling. I really dislike hurting other's feelings (if they are a good person), so I try and do what's good for everyone else while still being in my boundaries.

Originally Posted by fidelia

I've noticed on here that Fi users (ENFPs especially) tend to want to discuss problems in public without going to the offending person first. My first reaction to that is that it creates a massive mess to clean up, rarely ends up resolving anything and usually spawns several more issues. I'm focussed on the end result it has. I'm understanding that they feel that anything less would be sweeping something public under the carpet instead of being transparent about it. I also suspect that the act of airing those thoughts and emotions and sticking up for someone is more important to them than the resulting outcome. The purpose of starting that kind of thread maybe has nothing to do with what happens in the end?

I always saw these kinds of things as someone seeing if their feelings are shared by others; to express it publicly. To validate their feelings. They may not feel that everyone involved really understands how they felt. Once again with the perceiver thing, always taking in information about an issue.

Originally Posted by fidelia

From a Fe standpoint, it seems like just as much damage as the initial offense is incurred by not allowing the person a chance to respond or remedy the situation in anyway by making them aware of it.

Yeah if an Fi person makes a thread like that or does something like that, it's easy to say that they don't really care about the person's feelings. The damage has been done. No remedy is needed. Personally when someone does an offense like this; I'll make that judgment on them but still observe them to see if they've changed in some way. I try to stay at least civil with everyone, unless they are just genuinely a terrible person. Just because someone irks me or hurts my feelings, doesn't mean that they are a terrible person. Good people are to be treated in a good way, bad people to be treated in a bad way. In that very moment though, the offender could be seen as "bad" but then the person could come to terms with their feelings (time varying) and understand that they aren't that way.

Originally Posted by fidelia

It is possible to me (maybe this is Ni-Fe?) that there may be many reasons they acted as they did and perhaps not all of them were spawned with bad motivation or in an attempt to hurt someone or squash them.

Like what?

Originally Posted by fidelia

To me it seems unfair that instead of talking to the person in a way that isn't going to cause them to lose face (or face untrue accusations, especially when you may not have all the information), it jumps right away to public berating and generalizations. While an issue may have happened publicly, it may even be that a person may not be able to defend themselves without revealing information that would expose the other person or hurt them by having everyone know.

Most of these threads are spawned from constant ad hominem attacks (which no one ever seems to do anything about here; and there are a ton of people here who do these kinds of things). And it gets to a point where enough is enough. It's a "victory" for the person who didn't get banned over the issue, since they won the verbal battle. It's just the nature of the internet, and people having a huge drive to look correct in general and rationalizing/justifying EVERYTHING. Taking from the other's point of view to rationalize theirs even more. Etc. It's basic people theory. I can't even take these kinds of things seriously, they are so pointless. Makes the ad hominemer look like a complete moron in my opinion.

Originally Posted by fidelia

I think I understand the reasoning that a Fi person may use initially. What I'm fuzzy on is what is the outcome that you would foresee in ideal Fi world when you operate in this way?

First off, this is the internet. You can act however the hell you want and get away with it. You can just leave your computer or whatever. My guess is that Fi user's ideals don't really have much to do with these sorts of situations. Or at least that is how is works for me. Ideals are based on how I should treat people, how others should treat others, and when someone violates that I sort of forget where I'm really trying to come from. I see it as, if they violate it, they are exempt from it. But I've gotten better about it. The internet is an excuse to do unhealthy things though.

Originally Posted by fidelia

That everyone had a chance to say their say? That the public is aware that an offense happened? That you feel better having expressed your sentiments and now your conscience is clear?

I can't say much to this (just putting this here so you know I didn't ignore these), I think I covered most of this above. But yeah I'd say if someone says something publicly, then they want the public to know.

Originally Posted by fidelia

If you have done this and it hasn't turned out well for you (in a workplace setting, etc), does that affect what you do the next time? How would you see a person in charge ideally responding to that kind of outpouring? How would you see co-workers ideally responding?

Well every person is their own case. I probably wouldn't change how I acted in those kinds of situations, because every situation is different. I treat every situation differently (note: no Si).

I would see a supervisor ideally responding to this situation in a way like this- "what's the problem? If there is a problem, then I won't schedule you two together anymore" or something like that.

As for co-workers, ideally they would understand my sentiment and how the person is acting badly/in an immoral way.

A Fi-user said to me (I'm paraphrasing) that Fe-users disregard what is meant (intent) and focus on the tangible (form). I don't know if "form" is the right word, but I do think Fe-users focus on the results of emotional interaction and do think the intentions of others are secondary.

Does intent really outweigh results for Fi-users?

Example:
I do dislike when I'm read wrong, aka assigned a motivation/intent I did not have, when I hurt someone's feelings. My response is to take back what I've said/written, because obviously there was a communication failure. But with Fi-users that doesn't seem to work very often, because the misidentified intent still remains and I'm unsure how to correct that. As a (weak) Fe-user it's like a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't-trap.

I identify with a lot of what you've written here. It appears to me from earlier in the discussion that intent does outweigh results for Fi-users, but it might be better to hear it said directly as they would express it so I don't garble it.

Yeah, I think it just kind of highlights the difference between Fi and Fe speak. I would have reacted in the same way if it wasn't coming from PeaceBaby and in this thread specifically about Fi/Fe. I know she's working hard to provide the Fi perspective, and I'm now aware that the stuff that sounds natural to me can come across as judgmental to the Fi users. It's really fascinating.

I do agree that society itself really needs the balance between Fi and Fe. I want to expand on that, but I haven't been up that long and my brain is fuzzy. :-)